|Summary:||[patch] vdso is in user's way when exec-shield is off|
|Product:||[Fedora] Fedora||Reporter:||John Reiser <jreiser>|
|Component:||kernel||Assignee:||Roland McGrath <roland>|
|Status:||CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE||QA Contact:||Brian Brock <bbrock>|
|Version:||9||CC:||cebbert, davej, k.georgiou, triage, wtogami|
|Fixed In Version:||184.108.40.206-30.fc9||Doc Type:||Bug Fix|
|Doc Text:||Story Points:||---|
|Last Closed:||2008-06-06 07:44:34 UTC||Type:||---|
|oVirt Team:||---||RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:|
|Cloudforms Team:||---||Target Upstream Version:|
Description John Reiser 2007-02-20 03:48:32 UTC
Description of problem: On i386 the vdso is still being placed randomly even when exec-shield is off. This interferes with the user address space, because the vdso cannot be moved. Random placement reduces the contiguous space that otherwise would be available to the user. This is somewhat OK when exec-shield is on, but is not reasonable when exec-shield is off. Instead, when exec-shield is off, then the vdso should be placed at STACK_TOP, in order to interfere as little as possible with the user's use of address space. i686 boxes still must provide service for a while longer [before being replaced by x86_64 with 64-bit address space where the problem does not arise], including running applications that want maximal contiguous address space. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): kernel-2.6.20-1.2932.fc7 How reproducible: always Steps to Reproduce: 1. echo 0 >/proc/sys/kernel/exec-shield # turn off exec-shield 2. grep vdso /proc/self/maps 3. Actual results: 00924000-00925000 r-xp 00924000 00:00 0 [vdso] # or other address below 0x08048000 Expected results: bffff000-c0000000 r-xp bffff000 00:00 0 [vdso] # one page below TASK_SIZE Additional info: Related: bug 207020 (vDSO placement ignores exec-shield; inhibits NX simulation) See suggested patch linux-2.6-x86-vdso-stacktop-0.patch (attached.)
Comment 1 John Reiser 2007-02-20 03:48:32 UTC
Created attachment 148397 [details] put vdso at STACK_TOP when 0==exec_shield
Comment 2 Chuck Ebbert 2007-02-20 14:43:24 UTC
vDSO randomization is a feature added to the upstream kernel. I don't think anybody thought about an off switch for it. You could try: echo 0>/proc/sys/kernel/randomize_va_space The only other thing I can suggest is trying the kernel boot parameter "vdso=0", which will disable it completely. This may or may not be useful, and your system might not even boot with that set.
Comment 3 John Reiser 2007-02-20 16:20:05 UTC
Setting to zero all three of vdso, vdso_populate, and randomize_va_space still gives a random page for vdso in 2.6.19-1.2911.fc6. The f7 development installers via rescue CD and diskboot.img fail today; I'll test there soon.
Comment 4 Chuck Ebbert 2007-02-20 16:47:48 UTC
Comment 5 John Reiser 2007-02-20 20:24:32 UTC
Also setting vdso_enabled to zero (along with the three other variables mentioned before) still gives a random page for vdso in 2.6.19-1.2911.fc6.
Comment 6 John Reiser 2007-02-21 22:13:33 UTC
Created attachment 148544 [details] linux-2.6-x86-vdso-place.patch This patch to kernel-2.6.20-1.2936.fc7 places vdso for i386 according to the value in /proc/sys/vm/vdso_enabled: 0: no vdso at all 1: random free page 2: STACK_TOP 3: just below the .text of main 4: just below the .text of PT_INTERP
Comment 7 Chuck Ebbert 2007-02-22 00:23:56 UTC
Did you send your patch to the linux-kernel mailing list? If not, please do.
Comment 8 John Reiser 2007-02-22 21:09:12 UTC
Cross-reference: http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/2/22/301 fully honor vdso_enabled [i386, sh; x86_64?] John Reiser
Comment 9 Chuck Ebbert 2007-03-01 19:26:34 UTC
Hmm, /proc/sys/vm/legacy_va_layout changes things. Not sure if it's what you want, though.
Comment 10 Bill Nottingham 2007-03-02 17:41:52 UTC
Moving to 'devel' as discussed on https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-March/msg00095.html.
Comment 11 Chuck Ebbert 2007-04-27 20:18:40 UTC
You need to disable the vdso at boot time. Once booted it can't be changed AFAICT. So try booting with "vdso=0".
Comment 12 Bug Zapper 2008-04-03 19:12:01 UTC
Based on the date this bug was created, it appears to have been reported against rawhide during the development of a Fedora release that is no longer maintained. In order to refocus our efforts as a project we are flagging all of the open bugs for releases which are no longer maintained. If this bug remains in NEEDINFO thirty (30) days from now, we will automatically close it. If you can reproduce this bug in a maintained Fedora version (7, 8, or rawhide), please change this bug to the respective version and change the status to ASSIGNED. (If you're unable to change the bug's version or status, add a comment to the bug and someone will change it for you.) Thanks for your help, and we apologize again that we haven't handled these issues to this point. The process we're following is outlined here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/F9CleanUp We will be following the process here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping to ensure this doesn't happen again.
Comment 13 John Reiser 2008-04-07 02:42:53 UTC
The problem persists in 2.6.25-0.195.rc8.git1.fc9.i686, and has gotten worse. There is no way to turn off the vdso, not even booting with " vdso=0" appended to the kernel boot commandline. /proc/sys/vm/vdso_enabled says 0, but "grep vdso /proc/self/maps" still shows a vdso: ----- $ grep vdso /proc/self/maps 00131000-00132000 r-xp 00131000 00:00 0 [vdso] -----
Comment 14 Chuck Ebbert 2008-04-08 19:14:24 UTC
Does 'nosep' work?
Comment 15 Chuck Ebbert 2008-04-27 04:46:18 UTC
'nosep' should completely disable any VDSO by pretending the CPU doesn't support the sysenter instruction.
Comment 16 Roland McGrath 2008-04-27 20:12:22 UTC
That's not so, Chuck. That only affects the choice of which vDSO image to use.
Comment 17 Chuck Ebbert 2008-04-29 19:36:32 UTC
Patches were merged upstream for this: 5de253cc5b1f565f7aeb5bacd67bac37e943ceef x86 vDSO: don't map 32-bit vdso when disabled and 1a3e4ca41c5a38975023a6e8831c309d3322889c x86 vDSO: don't use disabled vDSO for signal trampoline
Comment 18 Bug Zapper 2008-05-14 02:38:09 UTC
Changing version to '9' as part of upcoming Fedora 9 GA. More information and reason for this action is here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping
Comment 19 Chuck Ebbert 2008-05-20 07:16:08 UTC
Patches in 220.127.116.11-27
Comment 20 Fedora Update System 2008-05-22 15:33:08 UTC
kernel-18.104.22.168-30.fc9 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 9
Comment 21 Fedora Update System 2008-05-29 02:51:17 UTC
kernel-22.214.171.124-30.fc9 has been pushed to the Fedora 9 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update kernel'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F9/FEDORA-2008-4630
Comment 22 Fedora Update System 2008-06-06 07:44:15 UTC
kernel-126.96.36.199-30.fc9 has been pushed to the Fedora 9 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.